Re: [atlarge-discuss] 020915 Going Forward...

[espresso@e-scape.net]

Hello, all,

My comments are interspersed below.

At 17:30 +0100 2002/09/15, Richard Henderson wrote:
>Some clarifications inserted...
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Walter Schmidt <walts@dorsai.org>
>To: Atlarge Discuss List <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
>Cc: Walter Schmidt <walts@dorsai.org>
>Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 4:36 PM
>Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] 020915 Going Forward...
>
>>    ...if I have this right
>>
>>  ---REgards, walts
>>
>> On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>
>> > ...The whole thing is about top-down control.
>
>*****RH: thw whole ICANN/DoC thing, that is - I'm advocating the opposite
>> >
>> > ...(a) strateg(y):
>> >
>> > ...A multi-faceted network of user communities, dealing with all
>> > issues to do with Internet use, freedom, access etc etc...(such that
>> > the) network could develop an identity of its own and come to stand
>> > for internet users.

JM: It seems to me the Internet itself automatically generates all kinds of "user communities". each grouped around a particular set of interests, and I've found myself participating in dozens of such groups on an ongoing basis. 

As I suggested earlier in our discussions, almost by accident I have found myself "tapped in" to networks concerned with specifically:
- women in technology
- the "digital divide"
- use of ICTs in international development
- open source and open standards issues
- transparent and democratic governance 
- computer privacy and security issues (technical and political)
- grassroots political and ecological organizations
- fellow-translators, Mac users, fans of particular software, etc., etc.
That is, as one individual I have (thanks to e-mail and mailing lists) the potential to inform something like 10,000 [!] Internet users politely that they can join a wider coalition on some particular issue if they'd like to -- without "spamming" or even using a bulk-mail program.
I suspect I'm not the only person among us who could help spread the word IF we had an agreed-upon word to spread.

>*****RH: yes, but of course, that can't just be "invented" - it can only
>arise out of the convictions people and organisations already hold, or will
>hold in the future... and the question is: how do you create the platform
>for a network? how to you call diverse groups together? how do you create a
>light-hand-on-the-tiller style of convocation for multiple and disparate
>groups? how does this move towards an allegiance of enclaves?

My point precisely. There is no need to invent the whole network -- most of its *current* members have already come together in various ways in diverse groups. The classic method of asking them to work together is simply to ask them! that is, to send a message through the already-existing channels which contains some basic information about the purpose of the coalition and where one can find out more about who is involved and what they'd like to do. If you do that, with a message that has meaning for the people who receive it, they forward it through their own networks.

It works remarkably well. How do you think all those hundreds of thousands of people ended up in places like Seattle, Quebec City, Genoa, Johannesburg, etc. for various events related to the corporate agenda for undoing 100 years of progress towards social justice by signing agreements behind closed doors with venial politicians, preventing the developing world from becoming anything more than a captive pool of cheap labour and source of cheap raw materials, etc.? In a word: "e-mail". 

The handfuls of rioters shown on your TV newscasts make for "good pictures" and help media conglomerates promote their own interest in keeping the general public ignorant of world events. The millions of non-rioters who write letters, vote, circulate petitions and news, work together in common efforts despite being widely separated geographically and having no money for postage and teleconferences, get little or no air-time but they just keep plugging away until it's clear something must be done to make AIDS medications available in Africa or keep the IMF from wrecking Latin American countries for the benefit of multinational mining companies and agrifood businesses.

>I guess I'm just thinking that you can't "impose" a single structure and
>hope it will capture imaginations... instead, perhaps we need the integrity
>of smaller groups who share various 'brands' of net-user community... maybe
>the building up has to happen much more localised, or across certain
>interests and issues... until people recognise a common interest ... the
>importance of users helping to shape the future of the Internet, >determining its evolution, having an integral say...

That's the whole beauty of the thing. There is NO single structure, nor is there any need for one. The Peace Movement of the 1960s had to do it slowly, cranking out pamphlets and posters with mimeograph machines, and delivering them by hand, and the U.S. didn't get out of Southeast Asia until 1975. The anti-globalization movement went from that to near-instantaneous worldwide distribution of information by e-mail in 1997-98 and it took less than a year to create the necessary loose, "headless" movement that unrelentingly distributes the news your local paper refuses to print, the text of treaties and court decisions, notice of upcoming events, the addresses of the politicians to write to, etc. The only way to stop that huge network would be to prevent *everyone* in it from using the Internet.

If the globalization issue is too controversial, look at some narrower ones.
A court in a Muslim African nation condemns a woman to be stoned to death for "adultery" after she's been raped, the word gets out, and the government of that country gets thousands of letters and faxes saying "stop the execution" and it is stopped. The women of Afghanistan needed books and school supplies for the underground schools for girls (illegal to educate women under the Taliban regime) and the word goes out, and donations come in. Pharmaceuticals corporations sue governments of poor countries which can't possibly pay for their products and resort to buying cheaper generic versions from India; the word goes out and those companies' North American and European customers write in droves to protest, so suddenly there is negotiation to let the developing world access medications at (somewhat) affordable prices. Then look at issues like covert data collection and sale by "reputable" Web sites, or the growth of the open source software movement to include governments and other non-geeks once the geeks let everybody know you don't *have* to use Microsoft products for everything and where to find the alternatives.

None of these things required "leadership" as such -- just somebody who uses communications effectively to get the ball rolling, and lots of other somebodies who keep it rolling in all directions. There doesn't need to be one organization to set policy for everyone's efforts -- there need to be lots of Web sites and mailing lists where information is shared, ideas get tossed around, and people decide what they themselves are willing and able to do.

>> >
>> > ...(in other words) to move towards the "long-game"
>> >
>> > ...a multiplicity of Internet User groups, that...(are) drawn together
>> > under...(our) umbrella - ...outside...(of) ICANN...(and) addressing
>> > many many more issues (of which ICANN is just one)
>
>
>***RH: NOT necessarily under "OUR" umbrella - I'm not prepared to say that
>icannatlarge.com can provide that umbrella... icannatlarge.com may be ONE >of the many groups under the umbrella - the fact that icannatlarge.com >seems to favour a fairly narrow mission related to ICANN's administration >of the DNS seems to indicate to me that icannatlarge.com may not itself be >destined to be the umbrella, though it may form part of a major bridgehead >if it develops strongly

I doubt the world will ever change itself by huddling under a single umbrella. This group's efforts need to be targetted and shaped according to what its goals really are. If the goals are defined narrowly -- say, to apply continuous pressure on ICANN and the DoC to democratize Internet/DNS decision-making -- then the message will not be of broad interest and should probably be directed towards sensitizing the technically-aware community to the socio-political implications of the current "blueprint" process. If the goals are defined more broadly and the support of the general Internet user is wanted, the news to be spread should include a good, non-technical, concise introduction to what exists and how you'd like to change it, as well as spelling out some concrete steps to effectuate the change.

I'm all for choosing a name and eliminating the personal acrimony. I'm against the notion that having a name and being more polite will be enough to mobilize others to join this group. People will join if an organization is doing something they believe needs to be done, using methods in which their participation will be meaningful. 

If we're not ready for that status, perhaps all we can do is organize our own efforts and provide a venue on the Web where people can find news, information and reasoned critiques if they're already interested in what ICANN is up to. At that point, we don't speak for them -- we let them speak for themselves but concentrate on helping to figure out what needs to be said and where to send their comments. A much smaller task, it requires only that the group already assembled here collaborate on producing a useful Web site and letting people know when it becomes fully operational.

Regards,

Judyth
(hanging in and hoping for a group decision soon)

##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
##########################################################



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de